2009/4/8 Andrew Davis <ncc...@gmail.com>: > And just an FYI from my own experience... putting Nagios & Cacti on the same > server has been somewhat problematic for us. We have over 400 network > devices between switches, routers, WAPs, etc. We also have about 300 > monitored servers. Initially I had Nagios and Cacti both on one server with > Cacti running via cron every 5 minutes. About every 5 minutes, my shells > would become unresponsive for roughly 30 to 90 seconds. Turning off either > Nagios or Cacti resolved the issue. Running both seems to have hammered the > server a bit (4Gb of RAM, 2 x dual core 2.x Ghz CPUs). We don't integrate > Cacti and Nagios, however. Nagios does both trending and alerts of all > servers. Cacti does trending only of all network devices/ports. Once I moved > Cacti to its own server, all was fine as far as load/latency went.
That's useful to know Andrew, thanks. Regarding the trending of network devices - is there any reason why this can't be done by Nagios? I intend to install PNP4Nagios to take care of graphing anyway, but I think it would be nice to have all my monitored resources under the one system (for notifications and ease of administration). Is there some major advantage that Cacti provides when it comes to SNMP monitoring of network devices that cannot be achieved with Nagios and the various SNMP plug-ins available for it (e.g. like these ones http://nagios.manubulon.com) ? Cheers, Chris ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment. Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com _______________________________________________ Nagios-users mailing list Nagios-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nagios-users ::: Please include Nagios version, plugin version (-v) and OS when reporting any issue. ::: Messages without supporting info will risk being sent to /dev/null
